Spanish Building Defects

A residents’ committee who represented the
occupants of 22 high-rise blocks of shared-ownership, ‘low-cost’ housing
built on land reclaimed from the Mediterranean, looked to expertese to help them resolve problems in their new flats. Concern over the building’s performance started when it began
to disrobe. At first it flung pieces of the clay lattice balcony screens from
the 10 to 12 story towers onto the walkways and gardens on the podium deck.
These were later joined by brick slips springing loose from floor edges. Lower
down, parts of the soffit of the podium deck began falling onto the residents’
parked cars. During the first severe winter, rain entered both flats and
garages.

The
residents’ had relied on locally-commissioned reports only to be met with
inaction and suggestions of political bias. Undaunted, they sought further
professional support from those with a solid reputation for objectivity and
dispute resolution.

The developer was pressed to help and an action was brought against the Spanish Contractor under
the design and build contract.

An
arbitrator was appointed and visited the site. Experts for both sides carried
out joint inspections and prepared evidence. The lists of
defects grew steadily. Simultaneously, legal challenges were heard in Spanish
and English courts. Eventually, by consensus, the arbitration was stopped and
proceedings transferred to the Technology and Construction Court in London.

Through a
series of experts' meeting the extent and nature of the defects was agreed and a substantial out of court settlement was obtained providing
compensation for both the legal and the repair costs.

I was then
approached by both the main contractor and one of his sub-contractors for
assistance in the action between them. I accepted a commission for the main
contractor who swiftly obtained an out of court settlement.

Simultaneously with the
preparation of expert evidence, the technical merit and
lifetime cost of seven repair strategies were evealuated. The remedy selected involved, amongst
other work, improving the tensile strength and restraint of the walls whilst
reducing their exposure to sun and rain. Additionally some hundreds of other
defects were addressed. A remedial contract was devised
which allowed the building to remain occupied
throughout.

The major flaws in weather integrity, stability, health and
safety have been resolved. Although faults in the building remain, local good
opinion of this achievement is reflected in the market value of the
flats.

The
failure in the building, which resulted in massive repair costs and legal
disputes, arose, to a large extent, from a lack of communication and
understanding. The quality of the work and the consistency of the poor detailing
indicated a lack of familiarity with the techniques appropriate to a building
designed in the UK tradition rather than any fundamental lack of ability.